if the models are aiming with the iron sight,it would be more realistic if you see the models closing his left eye,while aiming with the right eye,currently, you dont really have the feel that the models are aiming with the iron sight, it really dont look like the models are aiming,you see that the models are holding the rifle too low when it aims with the iron sight, when they aim with the iron sight, they should really hold the rifle infront of they're faces, thats more realistic.

and when the models are not aiming, it should look something like this:http://192.156.19.109/marinelink/image1 ... lowres.jpghttp://www.army-technology.com/contract ... device.jpgcurrently, when your not aiming, the models are holding the rifles too low, it should raise more up,why? cause it will look a hole lot cooler when the models are running/moving,you get the feel that the soldiers/models are really in a combat situation.cause they look more aware!!but currently, the models look extremely relaxed,when they're not aiming, and thats unrealistic,because real soldiers on real missions, would never look relaxed,they probably look excited / ready to kill.

here's an example of what i mean:

Dragonathan wrote:

take a look at this picture:

you see how low the model is holding the rifle, is way too low.it really should be raise more up, like i suggested on the previous post.

it wrote:

a SIG550 is heavy. if you're standing, you'll have it as low, if not lower, than the pic.

when moving, it should be higher, but it will never match the First Person models.

Dragonathan wrote:

take a look at this picture:http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/340/ ... mph8ff.jpgcheck the guy on the left corner, you see he's holding a pretty heavy rifle,and he dont hold it low,these are professional soldiers,not 12/13 year old skinny little kids, who barely can hold a big science book

it wrote:

they are being different than the models. the models are doing hip shots. hip shots mean you rest the butt of your rifle on your hip. in the picture they are doing shoulder shots. they are holding teh butt up to thier shoulder, but are not sing teh sights.

these are very different things.

Dragonathan wrote:

if you hold your rifle like: this in real life,

than you shouldnt be able to see this on your screen

Spartan wrote:

Dragonathan is correct about how the weapons are carried(although he could be a bit more tactful Wink ). Especially if these guys are supposedly special forces so they should have no problem. I completed my service in the army about 2 years ago and I have to tell you, weight of the weapon doesnt matter, you get used to it, I had to slug around the M249 for 5 years...and in combat or wargames you want to have that thing at the ready, and that thing is much heaver then any of these sniper rifles would be. Of course we held our weapons at an angle most of the time like the following images, I think this perhaps would be more accurate for this mod.

Terrorists on the other hand...no reason to change their stances as they generally are an untrained rabble...just watch videos of their "training" haha...holding AK-47s sideways and firing them...wtf! Laughing

XenoKiller wrote:

It doesnt really make sense to hold a gun down in a plce where the enemy can pop out of anywhere and a place where your absolutely sure that there are no civilians around.

XenoKiller wrote:

Well, these guys are all right, that is a small graphical error that isnt really a priority right now. maybe when the game hits version 1.00 then they can bother about the little things. If your gonnan say its gonna hurt TCE's competition agaisnt CS, well TT isnt trying to beat CS, they are only trying to make a mod for ET players not hit top one on the charts and knock CS off, although I dont hink they mind if that happens. But remember, there are hundreds of CS players and loyal fans for every single one of us Quakers. HL and CS fans outnumber the quakers by a big number so I dont think that will amke any difference because the HL2 mod teams can easily top what we have in mere days of what is taking TT years.

Dragonathan wrote:

Silentcrisis wrote:

How the weapons are carried now can't really be changed. Just deal with it, you can't have everything.

~Silentcrisis

Spartan wrote:

Dragonathan is correct about how the weapons are carried(although he could be a bit more tactful Wink ). Especially if these guys are supposedly special forces so they should have no problem. Icompleted my service in the army about 2 years ago and I have to tell you, weight of the weapon doesnt matter, you get used to it, I had to slug around the M249 for 5 years...and in combat or wargames you want to have that thing at the ready, and that thing is much heaver then any of these sniper rifles would be. Of course we held our weapons at an angle most of the time like the following images, I think this perhaps would be more accurate for this mod.

now thats a very very good point why the devs should fix this,a real life trained professional soldier gave you people the answer why its not correct to hold your rifle too low "even if your not aiming"

Dragonathan wrote:

if someone is using pistol,and when hes aiming and not aiming,

you wont see any difference, the 3rd person model holds his pistol the same way, even when he aims or not aim,

the arms and hands is doing nothing,

and the 3rd person model seems to hold the pistol with 1 hands when he is crawling,

it would be more appropraite if the 3rd person model still use both hands even when hes crawling.

TC:E only has Hip & IS - you're talking about different things. It is true that the 1st person view looks like something between shoulder and hip but it is intended to be at the hips and that is what the 3rd person model represents (properly).

TC:E has Ironsights (which is not too accurate because the head/eyes is a bit too far away from the sights): clicky(don't be confused that it's a Trauma model, the anims are the same...just didn't find a better picture).or here.

and Hips: clicky

Not featured is "shoulders".

The ironsighted view doesn't bring the weapon close enought to the model's eyes, that is true but it is a

2.) Limitation of WET engine. Actually, all 3rd person animations are anims from original ET. It doesn't make any difference between firemodes etc., in ET you simply "hold the gun". The ironsight animation is an anim of a certain weapon in ET (forgot which) that is suboptimal (same thing like the left hand having a distance to the weapon). The devs KNOW about these issues (they are obvious, aren't they?) but it still isn't sure if the software bought by the donations last year will really let them alter the anims.

This has all been answered so often...

Animation issues MIGHT be corrected. But TT's not 100% sure. If you have such big problems with sooooo many aspects of the game ("the devs have to change this, they need to implement that, this looks crappy, that is not shiny enough, isn't destructable, tires on cars don't deflate, water doesn't look good enough etc. etc.) - why don't you go and play a different game? If I think a game needs so damn much improvement or it won't appeal to me as a gamer - I play a different game.

This is not a "who finds out the most insufficiencies of an outdated game engine"-contest. If you like it or not.

Dragonathan wrote:

i play allot of other games,

i dont play allot of pc games though, allot of console games,most pc games are the same, FPS, STRATEGY, RPG, and thats about it,

console games are more original, more different type of games with a hole different concept,

the reason i fallow this project, is because the communication between the community and the devs are really good, you can give comments & suggestions, and theres big chance the developers gonna read your comments & suggestions,

just by having a really long thread and improperly title topic will turn them away.

In the Quake engine, what you see in third person isnt what you see in firstperson. That is why things look different. And for some reason the camera isnt even in the right place by default, making the hip level seem higher and the third person view of ironsight aiming not really where the eye is. It is like the camera itself in somewhre around the throath just to give the illusion of proper proportion of the game itself. Quake wasnt meant to be played like this. It was designed with arcade-like hip level shooting not aiming.

America's army however, based on the UT2k4 engine, UE2.5, it was heavily modified by the Department of defense's own MOVES Institute. Thy design training software and applications for the DoD. In game, in any friendly fire situation or when ever you shouldnt be firing, the game automatically lowers the rifle into shouldered ready position. When you stand next to a close door, it is in hip, when you move towards the door, it is lowered to ready because of possible richochett, when you open the door it quickly goes back to raised ready position pointing forward.

That isnt possible for the current state of TCE and the engine itself, having limited number of animations. Quake only had two weapon positions, hip or aim (for sniper rifles or scoped). TCE makes use of both, using the scope mode as the ironsight moe with reduced zoom. Other games however were designed for ironsights and may feature more than one gun position. AA has ironsight, shoulder readied, lowered, holstered, and crawling (where the gun is rested on your arms while they are crossed as you crawl instead of having it holstered)

Dragonathan wrote:

XenoKiller wrote:

That isnt possible for the current state of TCE and the engine itself,

Melmoth wrote:

The devs may be able to change the anims (this is an animations issue) with the software bought from the donations last year. It seems to be difficult but it might be possible.

Didn't this matter already get resolved, something about the engine would not take it, and how much does it really matter about how you look at a guy, if he shoots you, it's up, if he doesn't, it's not and you should shoot back.

And I didn't think the SIG550 was all that heavy, I have used them and it seemed about as much as an AKS-74U. Maybe I'm just stronger than all of oyu though.

well... we all want it realistic, but you gotta take note on the current limitations of the engine and its 3d models and animation system. If you can convince Coroner to give MD4 technology (the skeletal animation system for Q3engine) a try, then this problem can be fixed with a simple click and drag.

Just wondering, I didn't bother reading your posts since your suggestions were and still are trivial and pointless.

~Silentcrisis

if you think my ideas are pointless, than stop reading all my ideas, thats what i do, when i "personally" think someones suggestion is pointless,

just check the title, and if you think is not intresting ignore it,its really easy you know... you will never see mee insulting someone when he suggest an idea that i dont agree on, and if really feel to post my expression about his idea, than i will give a friendly constructive critic why it is not a good idea.

XenoKiller wrote:

well... we all want it realistic, but you gotta take note on the current limitations of the engine and its 3d models and animation system. If you can convince Coroner to give MD4 technology (the skeletal animation system for Q3engine) a try, then this problem can be fixed with a simple click and drag.

so you wanna say if the devs use MD4, the animations will be easier to animate?

_________________call me Dragon

Last edited by Dragonathan on Sun Jul 09, 2006 9:10 am, edited 3 times in total.

Well, it's a little hard to avoid your writings seeing that they pop up in every corner of the forum.

I mean, you spread like small pox in a ventillation system.

Didn't you go elsewhere on other forum's and bombard them with your halfassed comments and thoughtless entries? Or did they just shoot you down like we do here?

But I think you're trying to say, on a level of intelligence that must be incredibally below me or, somehow, much higher than me, that you want constructive criticism.

So my good old friend, I shall grant you my criticism so that we may spare the moment.

My Constructive CriticismIf you want to make a point or catch the interest of members who are or more critical than I am, you will post ideas and suggestions that haven't already been suggested or expanded upon by a member of this forum or, most commonly, by yourself.

This is one of my pet-peeves and I usually catagorize the topic as spam without reading any further. But do not worry, I do not close or move a topic without proper approval by another moderator or site administrator for I actually respect people at my level or people who are far more superior than me (Something you should reflect on)

So, if you want to gain any credability from me, or from any of the other people who dislike your methods, that is one bad habbit you should have left out of this forum when you last parted from this forum.

I don't mind your visits here and your random queries on threads but I can only take so much...

Of course its better when it’s more real, but I think its better that people stick to a “gaming feel”. Personally I don’t think its good that videogames get to realistic because some people already have a hard time dealing with reality as it is, but hey is just my opinion. Im not saying your suggestion is bad cuz it does make sense but like I said videogames should stay videogames.

so you think its better if the models look realisitc,but you also think its better if the models look like disabled retarded humans?

but serieus i can see where your comming from,there are indeed some games that are restricted to make the realism way too realistic, because it would be too violent, but,

yes there is a big but here...

this mod isnt a commercial game yet, its still underground, so the devs can make this game realistic to the fullest if they wanted too,i will attract mor epeople though.

and the dev could always put a warning signal in the start of the intro something like:

this game contains explicit violence,it is rated for above 18 years.

is not that i wanna prevent the youngsters to play this game, (they gonna play it anyways)but just so the devs wont get angry letters from parents that are overconered about theyre children playing hardcore realistic games,

the devs will have a backup and can say that they have put a warning signs in the start of the intro.

see... problem solved, no lawyers cant sue the devs no more if the devs just put that warning sign on the start of the intro.

i respect anyone, accept for the one's that dont respect me<--but you made your point,

can we stay on topic now?thanks,

about that MD4....

I was very much on topic if you bothered to read any of it.

As for respect. I'll show respect to anyone who I think will return the favor. Seeing that you are just some pompous kid with haphazard ideas that likes to gain attention through stupid ideas is kind of sad buddy.

Now, yes dragon, MD4 will make TCE more realistic by havng better animations and making it easier to add additional animations. The problem is, idSoftare scrapped the MD4 and it was only used in one game in its history. Q3E was stuck with only MD3. They only began using skeletal animations again when they made Doom3 using the MD5 technology.

Now, currently, there are outside groups that are trying to reintegrate MD4 into the GPLed version of the engine. If you have read id's notes for the GPLed engine, they mentioned that MD4 was removed from the engine code compeltely. So you can imagine how hard it will be to rewrite the code. Not that it is impossible, but if the devs could put their minds to it, and everyone inluding the devs is wiling to wait alot longer until the final version comes out jsut to integrate this, then this is the answer. He might need alot of convincing before even thinking about this. Currently, as seen in the rontpage, Coroner is imporving TCE's lighting with client HDRi effects giving TCE lighting similar to CounterStrike: Source. SO you can see that he is busy.

so you think its better if the models look realisitc,but you also think its better if the models look like disabled retarded humans?

but serieus i can see where your comming from,there are indeed some games that are restricted to make the realism way too realistic, because it would be too violent, but,

yes there is a big but here...

this mod isnt a commercial game yet, its still underground, so the devs can make this game realistic to the fullest if they wanted too,i will attract mor epeople though.

and the dev could always put a warning signal in the start of the intro something like:

this game contains explicit violence,it is rated for above 18 years.

is not that i wanna prevent the youngsters to play this game, (they gonna play it anyways)but just so the devs wont get angry letters from parents that are overconered about theyre children playing hardcore realistic games,

the devs will have a backup and can say that they have put a warning signs in the start of the intro.

see... problem solved, no lawyers cant sue the devs no more if the devs just put that warning sign on the start of the intro.

*but you also think its better if the models look like disabled retarded humans?* hmmm well they dont seem so retarded to me...but i guess it would maybe look better if the models would hold the guns better.

And I didn't think the SIG550 was all that heavy, I have used them and it seemed about as much as an AKS-74U. Maybe I'm just stronger than all of oyu though.

lol!! and you know some people even suggested swinging if you aim,lmao!! like said, a trained soldier is used to carry on heavy things,.

Oh so either your saying I am a trained soldier, or really strong, thank you. I like the trained soldier thing, just stick to that and we can all think I am a SF soldier, 6'3", which actually, I got the height, and I way 240 Lbs. all muscle, yeah, thats me, everyone, thats what I am now, just keep thinking that.